AN ATTEMPT to grant a man acquitted of rape anonymity in a civil case brought by his alleged victim has been rejected.
Stephen Coxen, from Bury in Lancashire, is being sued for £100,000 in damages by a woman he was alleged to have raped in St Andrews in 2013.
Coxen, 23, denied the charges and in 2015 the case was found not proven, which in Scots law is an acquittal.
Now, his alleged victim has launched a civil action which is being heard at the Personal Injury Court in Edinburgh.
On Tuesday, Coxen's lawyers argued he should be granted anonymity, but this was refused by Sheriff Kenneth McGowan due to the publicity from his previous High Court trial.
Sheriff McGowan said: "It seems unlikely that the granting of such an order would have any practical effect.
"This hearing should proceed without anonymity."
Coxen's lawyers also tried to have the case moved to the Court of Session, saying there was a "public interest" in doing so.
This motion was refused by Sheriff McGowan over fears it would delay proceedings.
He said: "The focus in this case is going to be on very many tricky questions, very delicate questions in the evidence.
"It does not appear to me that the kind of difficulty in this case would justify or merit a remit to the Court of Session.
"The case is an important one, particularly for the parties, but importance doesn't cut both ways.
"It's part of justice that it be dealt with sooner rather than later.
"The sooner this matter is dealt with the better."
The trial is due to begin in June, however Coxen's lawyer is first trying to get the court access to an audio copy of evidence given by the alleged victim, who cannot be named, in the previous High Court case.
An application on this matter is now being made to the Advocate General and the case before Sheriff McGowan will continue on Thursday.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article